Page 4 of 17
| Re: All RAIB Reports 03/02/2012 at 17:05 #28753 | |
AndyG
1842 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into a passenger train derailment on the Midland Main Line near East Langton, Leicestershire, 20 February 2010. The RAIB has made four recommendations. R012012_East_Langton.pdf I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 16/02/2012 at 11:19 #29560 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has today released its report into the driver of a tamper being struck by a passenger train at Torworth, Nottinghamshire, on 8 January 2011. R022012_Torworth.pdf I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 04:13 #30842 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into two incidents involving track maintenance staff, between Clapham Junction and Earlsfield stations, on 8 March 2011. The RAIB has made five recommendations. Click here to read more on the Rail Accident Investigation Website Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Last edited: 23/03/2012 at 04:21 by UKTrainMan Reason: to put the links to the reports in release date order Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 04:14 #30843 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into a boiler incident on the Kirklees Light Railway, 3 July 2011. The RAIB has made two recommendations. Click here to read more on the Rail Accident Investigation Website Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Last edited: 23/03/2012 at 04:23 by UKTrainMan Reason: to put the links to the reports in release date order Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 04:15 #30844 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into the partial failure of Bridge 94, near Bromsgrove, 6 April 2011. The RAIB has made three recommendations. Click here to read more on the Rail Accident Investigation Website Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Last edited: 23/03/2012 at 04:21 by UKTrainMan Reason: to put the links to the reports in release date order Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 09:12 #30845 | |
|
Javelin395
272 posts |
Just read the report into the derailment near Dryclough Jct, Halifax. Whilst I'm not an expert I have to say that Calderdale Council really do seem to have been on the ball. Sadly the same can not be said of Network Rail. Time after time in these reports Network Rail seem to simply collect data and then fail to process or act upon it.
Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 18:53 #30854 | |
|
Javelin395
272 posts |
Also been reading with interest the report into the derailment of a Cl222 at East Langton as I sometimes use the Midland Mainline between Sheffield and St Pancras. As always, I acknowledge I'm no expert (I don't even work on the railway) but I am surprised to read that a driver of a train running close to 100mph is interrogating the TMS rather than keeping a lookout for lineside signals. Fair enough, the train will continue in the correct direction (unlike my car) but I do feel uneasy about such a practice. Surely a case for a secondman? I seem to recall the Southall crash was put down to the driver of the IC125 looking down to his bag and failing to acknowledge the caution signal before ploughing in to a freight train crossing infront. I fail to see how interrogating the TMS is any different.
Last edited: 23/03/2012 at 18:54 by Javelin395 Reason: typo Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 19:35 #30858 | |
lazzer
634 posts |
Can you explain to me how the driver's observation of lineside signals contributed to that derailment? Having briefly looked through the report, the driver's only fault was not to follow the correct procedure when presented with a certain alarm on the TMS. Had he come across a yellow signal during his TMS interrogation he would have received an AWS indication, which would have diverted his attention from the TMS and caused him put the brakes in anyway. Failure to do THIS would indeed be a gross dereliction of his duties. In the case of Southall, the train was running with its ATP switched off, and with the AWS isolated. I would never take a train in that state, and FGW would not let it run today. But back then it was a different story. The driver was indeed looking in his bag and missed both the double and single yellows. I often pass both of those signals at green and consider what it would have been like for him to have come round the corner and seen the next one at red. There is no doubt he would have braked had he not been distracted. Either of the isolated safety systems would have alerted him and helped him to prevented the collision. There is no comparison between Southall (no safety systems) and the derailment of a train due to a technical failure (all systems working, including the one the driver was using, which is supposed to help!) As for TMS - in my opinion, it's not something we need on trains. I've been driving HSTs for several years and I've never needed it. Trains are becoming too computerised, and the TMS is just another distraction for the driver. No doubt the union will sweeten the deal when the new trains arrive, complete with a computer that only Steve Jobs could have operated ... Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Javelin395 |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 19:50 #30859 | |
|
Javelin395
272 posts |
Lazzer, as I admitted I'm neither an expert nor a railwayman. Neither did I say that the driver interrogating the TMS contributed to the East Langton incident. I just feel uneasy that someone in charge of several hundred ton of metal moving at 70 odd mph was 'busy' reading a computer screen. I'd expect a serious fine if I were caught doing that in my car !! I hasten to add that I don't do that - I won't even change a CD on the move because I have received excellent training and am therefore aware of the dangers. I'm similarly aware that I'm not perfect and I can and will make mistakes. Your point about no working ATP in the Southall incident is duly noted - I'd forgotten that. In that case it is even worse to me as a rail user and non expert that the driver was not completely focussed on the job in hand. No doubt the driver concerned will feel a heavy burden for the rest of his days. We all do things that we shouldn't without a moment's thought for the consequences and it is pure luck that we don't find ourselves caught in a similar mailstrom of our own making. I know you are a driver and I apologise if you feel that I was having a pop at you and your colleagues. You obviously take your responsibilities as seriously as I would hope. I was merely stating my own personal opinion as a non-expert. In my defence, and without wishing to inflame anyone, the RAIB report does say that the driver was not following correct procedure when interrogating the TMS in response to the bogie fault indication. They even cite this as a contributory factor. I completely accept that we are all human and none of us (myself included) ever really know how we would respond in an unfamiliar situation. It's down to excellent training and good fortune in my opinion. What are you opinions on a secondman? Sort of guess you would say no need as you wouldn't have the TMS in the first place? PS I'm not going to comment any further on this matter as I don't wish to start a 'slanging match'. Apologies to anyone I've unintentionally offended. Last edited: 23/03/2012 at 20:20 by Javelin395 Reason: clarification Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 20:17 #30860 | |
|
lazzer
634 posts |
Oh worry not - no offence taken! B) I agree with you with regard to distraction by pointless systems. I don't really want to be driving along fiddling with a computer screen that is showing me faults all over the train (ever driven a 180? We used to play "Fault Bingo" on those. If every coach turns yellow before the end of the journey, you win!) In the end, we just ignored it unless it went red. Hopefully they have addressed this issue since they went to Hull Trains. Secondmen - I started after secondmen were abolished (the only reason they existed on post-steam trains was to save making thousands of firemen redundant). As a result I have never really thought about having someone sat next to me simply to remind me what the signals are showing. I suppose ATP goes some way to replacing them, but we don't have ATP of the majority of our routes, so that's a weak argument. I'm not really sure I'd WANT one now. I suppose I would see it as a "threat"; I might even resent their presence, and a lot of drivers would see it as management showing distrust of them. And think of the cost ... Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Javelin395 |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 20:23 #30861 | |
|
Javelin395
272 posts |
Your comments re fault bingo cracked me up ... ... ... 
Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 20:39 #30862 | |
|
Javelin395
272 posts |
With regards a secondman, all your points make sense to me as an interested member of the travelling public. I admire you for you honesty in admitting how having a secondman sat alongside you would make you feel. I sometimes think I could do with one as a humble car driver - I can recall a few occasions where I've suddenly found myself wondering whether I'm in a 40mph or 30mph zone so god knows how you guys do it !! At least I can slow down to 30mph until I see the next board. Worst that can happen is someone behind gets the hump and sounds their horn in disgust. I can imagine that would totally screw the timetable for you guys. Then again, IIRC you guys have route knowledge - something I don't necessarily have as a car driver. Just given more thought to what I said about I can slow down to 30mph if I'm unsure. Obviously the person behind could lose patience and attempt to overtake me then be faced by an oncoming vehicle. Exactly what I say about we all do things without truly appreciating the consequences. I'd feel guilt even though it would technically the fault of the person who made the wrong call in overtaking. My suggestion about a secondman stems from my interest in commercial aviation where I believe "one man operates the levers whilst the other operates the computer". Obviously the potential consequences of an error in the sky are just as bad, if not worse, than on two rails. Last edited: 23/03/2012 at 20:52 by Javelin395 Reason: clarification Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 23/03/2012 at 22:04 #30863 | |
jc92
3685 posts |
regards drivers assistants/secondmanning, it comes in to play more with loco hauled and goods workings where its handy to have someone else to couple up/ exchange tokens, observe trains out of the platform etc, equally when wagonload still existed the S/m could act as shunter, although equally this could be a guards duty. i dont see an enormous point in DAs nowadays as most of these roles are reduntant with modern block trains and units, where going under and/or shunting isnt required, and where it is, a shunter is paid eg depots. in regards to observance of signals, quite a few DAs can be lapse on the assumption the driver knows what hes doing and is fully mentally capable, so may well not even bothering to do his job properly "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Javelin395 |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 24/03/2012 at 07:32 #30867 | |
|
lazzer
634 posts |
Exactly - each think the other is watching, so in the end, neither watches!
Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 24/03/2012 at 09:58 #30869 | |
DriverCurran
688 posts |
My understanding is that the requirement used to be that a second driver was required on any train that was running at greater than 100 mph. Regarding the use of the on board diagnostic equipment, during my driving days the same applied to this equipment as to the cab secure radio in that you only responded to it when it was safe and convient to do so. Paul You have to get a red before you can get any other colour Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Javelin395 |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 29/03/2012 at 08:30 #31038 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into a collision between a train and a tractor at White House Farm user worked crossing on 25 September 2011. The RAIB has identified a number of learning points as a result of this accident. R062012_White_House_Farm.pdf I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 16/04/2012 at 08:25 #31631 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
RAIB bulletin published regarding a track worker struck by a passing train near North Kent East Junction. B012012_North_Kent_East_Jct.pdf I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 30/05/2012 at 08:11 #32646 | |
|
AndyG
1842 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report into a pedestrian fatality following a collision with a tram in Piccadilly Gardens, Manchester, 5 June 2011. The RAIB has made one recommendation. R082012_Piccadilly_Gardens.pdf I can only help one person a day. Today's not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look too good either. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 30/05/2012 at 13:14 #32651 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has released its report in which a passenger was trapped in train doors and pulled along a platform at London King’s Cross station, 10 October 2011. The RAIB has made one recommendation and identified two learning points. Click here to read more on the Rail Accident Investigation Website. Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 30/05/2012 at 23:15 #32656 | |
|
Josie
310 posts |
I read the King's Cross one this morning. Found it slightly worrying that the driver overrode a passcomm during departure and kept going until Finsbury Park; found it very worrying that most drivers said they'd have done the same.
Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 31/05/2012 at 17:12 #32660 | |
|
guidomcc
246 posts |
not saying it was right, but he was into the station throat when it was pulled. i don't know the track layout at KX but i suspect if it hadn't been something as serious, he wouldn't have been very popular :|
Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 31/05/2012 at 17:18 #32661 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2078 posts |
Possibly not, but the point is that it was not worth the risk in any case. No manager would be able to justify "bollocking" any person for taking the correct safety decision. It would seem that once again driver training has proved to not be good enough. Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 31/05/2012 at 21:32 #32667 | |
|
Josie
310 posts |
I was on a (heritage) train once which did an emergency stop arriving at a station. In the event it was only because the signalman put the wrong lever back and the signal went to danger in front of the guard, who used his emergency brake; but for all the guard knew someone could have fallen onto the track in the station or something equally as nasty. Emergency systems are there for a reason, and when they're used it should be 'stop first, ask questions later' - if nothing's moving you're (almost) guaranteed that everything's safe!
Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 31/05/2012 at 21:39 #32668 | |
headshot119
4869 posts |
The ability for the driver to override a passcom activation is essential, and it should certainly not be removed. If an activation occurs within a tunnel, or on a viaduct, or in any other location unsuitable to detrain passengers, it is necessary for the driver to override the system to allow the train to be stopped in a more suitable location. The issue here seems to be driver training, and the fact the dispatcher did not correctly check the train doors where closed. Would the incident have occurred on a non DOO (Driver Only Operated) service? "Passengers for New Lane, should be seated in the rear coach of the train " - Opinions are my own and not those of my employer Log in to reply |
| Re: All RAIB Reports 31/05/2012 at 22:06 #32669 | |
|
Josie
310 posts |
" said:The ability for the driver to override a passcom activation is essential, and it should certainly not be removed. If an activation occurs within a tunnel, or on a viaduct, or in any other location unsuitable to detrain passengers, it is necessary for the driver to override the system to allow the train to be stopped in a more suitable location.Sorry, yes, I wasn't suggesting that the passcomm should automatically stop the train - by 'stop first' I meant that the driver should make the decision to stop unless it's not safe to do so (e.g. tunnels etc.), and not worry about what it's going to do to the rest of the service. " said: Would the incident have occurred on a non DOO (Driver Only Operated) service?I'd hope a guard would have a better view of the train doors than the dispatcher did in this case, so probably wouldn't dispatch the train. Log in to reply |